Is Melting Lead at 1000C Hazardous?

Heating anything to 1000° C can produce burning hazards. As far as vapor hazards, you will be increasing the extremely small amount of partial vapor pressure solid lead produces at room temperature. The problem will all be in the unstated details.

To reach 1000° C something must be hotter than that. To reach 1000°C in a timely fashion will require something considerably hotter than that, like an open flame. Can lead particles or droplets reach this heat source? Lead does boil around 1700° C but lead oxide boils at about 1500° C. How pure will be the lead?

In simpler terms, I don't expect the lead fumes from this molten lead to be hazardous at 1000° C if that's the only thing that happens.

I think the lead will be 99% pure.
So lead melts at 327,52 °C, then if you heat it and melt it with 430 C or with 700 C or with 1000 or 1100 C there should be no real difference then, as you say, it should not be hazardous at 1000 C, which is also true for 1100 C i guess?, because that's the temperature i might want it melted at, either 1100 C or 1000 C, depending on what kind of furnace i will use.
It will be melted in either a furnace that only can reach a little above 1000 C (not much above) or a another kind of furnance that can reach much higher temperatures, and then the lead will be poured out so it falls in the air a bit, should not be any problems with either furnace?.

The vapor pressure of lead at 1000 C^o is about 2 mmhg. Atmospheric pressure is 760 mmhg.

This chart shows vapor pressure of various elements.

https://www.powerstream.com/vapor-pressure.htm

And this means what?, that it is fine and safe and kinda the same as 450C or someting like that?

A little research indicates that melting lead is not very safe.

https://pksafety.com/blog/fishermen-making-lead-sinkers-need-respirators

http://www.dph.illinois.gov/sites/default/files/publications/lead-safety-fishermen-041516.pdf

https://www.edf.org/news/home-lead-melting-draws-national-warning-producers-obey-california-law

https://m.wikihow.com/Melt-Lead

I linkes this website in my post https://pksafety.com/blog/fishermen-making-lead-sinkers-need-respirators
It says it is fine and safe?, as i said, when you have the right gear, no problem. You are linking a site saying there is no problem when i am asking someting specific that i need info about. 1000 C should not be any problems comapred to 400 C as i understand it?, but i would like to get the facts by someone who knows.

I knew it. You didn't want a new safety insight, you wanted your conclusions confirmed.

There are two important things that safety article doesn't point out. First, one has to know how to use any personal protective equipment for it to be effective. Second, lead is a cumulative poison. Lead is neither excreted nor metabolised by the body. So whatever tiny amounts of lead enters a body will be there until they die. Since most people live longer today cumulative lead poisoning is a bigger concern.

Good luck.

Please do everyone else a favor and do a thorough clean up. You shouldn't risk others with your experiments.

You said yourself that there would be no big problem with fumes, i am not making the experiment, a university is, and they are skeptical about it, talking about that they can melt it to a bit over 400 C, i need the real facts if it is safe with the right ventelation and gear to bring it up to 1000 C or 1100 C so i can show it to them since i feel the experiment is important for me, i have emailed some experts that might know also, i only want the facts, if it indeed is a big risk then i will haft to accept this and that i cant make the experiment like i want it.
PS i am greatful for all info, just looking for a very conclusive answer that i can show the university.

Yes, and drink plenty of milk.

It means that, at equilibrium, the volume percentage of lead in the surrounding atmosphere will be 2 parts in 760, or about ¹/₄%. So it would be wise to contain that material so that it does not come into contact with any life forms, notwithstanding the damage that temperatures of <...1000C...1100C...> can be expected to cause in the absence of <...lead...>.

All safety is relative.

You might find this helpful:

Controlling Lead Exposures in the Construction Industry: Engineering and Work Practice Controls

I am told that the guys i will be working at has no problem with melting lead at a little above 400 C and that the ventelation is good and that they got good gear, i am told in this forum that the fumes at 1000 C should not be a problem.
This is what i wanna know, i do know that lead is toxic, this is not the problem, sa i said they have gear and ventelation, what i wanna know is that if you have ventelation and gear, then i dont think it matters if you melt it at 400 C or 1000 C, i have emailed some experts so hope i can get some real info as i need to know if the experiment can be done or not, the guys i will be working with have never melted lead at 1000 C so they might not know how the true risks looks etc, i dont see why there should be any risk at 1000 C with good ventelation and gear, i dont want them to cancel a experiment when they dont need to, if it is safe (with gear and ventelation), it is safe, and they should listen to what the facts are.

From my very limited experience, that looks more like aluminum than lead. Also, the quantity seems to rule out lead, unless the pickup was carrying a bunch of LA batteries in the back. Do you have any details?

That was clearly a very hot fire!

Yeah that's aluminum, the wheels I'm guessing...Shows the level of heat....I once rode by a car fire on the Interstate, I was in the far left lane and the car was off the side of the road on the far right, three lanes away...I had the windows up tight and could still feel the heat burning my skin....I was amazed....

My first question is WHY!

Once lead melts there is no point raising the temperature more because the lead quickly oxidises and forms a lead oxide scum which containg red lead and white lead oxides, both hazardous.

If you intend to heat it to 1000c then you best research how to gather the gas coming off as well as the dross because you will find a high loss of lead in your 1000c heating. Then you need to measure the starting mass and the final mass of the lead after this effort. When lead reaches red heat it oxidises rapidly. When casting shot much above melting point of lead oxide inclusions become a problem

As I said WHY are you heating it above the melting point?

...can't quote figures of soldering irons - but isn't this linked to reasons by solder should be 'lead-free' .... just a thought!

Part of it is the objective of eliminating <...lead...> from the public water supply, where <...lead...> pipes and <...lead...>-containing solders need to be phased-out for public health reasons.

Areas where <...lead...> is still prevalent can be protected by introducing fractions-of-a-part-per-million of orthophosphoric acid into the drinking water supply. Lead phosphate is practically insoluble and forms a protective layer that prevents <...lead...> leaching into the water. The acid is harmless in these quantities, and in a stronger form is a significant component of most cola drinks.

Tetra-ethyl <...lead...>, a material that had been introduced to alter combustion character, has now been practically eliminated from spark-ignition-engine fuels, with measurable reductions of <...lead...> in the environment close to heavily-used roads, particularly in cities.

Thanks PWSlack #21 - frightening to think about it. We grew up in a house with lead water pipes, and my brother literally a real plumber, working on water pipes, roofing, guttering, draind etc, - and worse perhaps - hot-brazing leaded-lights and in the foundry casting large areas of molten lead to make sheets...

.....and me, as a kid, going to work on a push-bike (hard work 30 miles round-trip daily for years) in the thick of traffic - gasping in lung-fulls of (pre smog law) London air....

.....phew!

Pardon the etymological intrusion: the word for the occupation <...plumber...> is derived from Lat. plumbum, which means <...lead...>.

At the very least, it could significantly depend on the (purity/impurity) of the lead being melted...

It depends upon whatever else is present as impurities. If it were calcium or magnesium, then those things are generally beneficial to life forms; if it were plutonium, the converse would be true.

Neither of those things affect the toxicity of lead at any temperature and pressure.

Short answer is yes.

Longer answer is Yes because super heated lead can cause severe burns to exposed skin and will drag inclusion of whatever material you're wearing when you get splashed int the wound. Lead fumes and dross dust are injurious to human respiratory systems in any quantity.

Look up any document dealing with super heated metals and that should answer your question.

My curiosity beggars me to ask why are you doing this experiment considering the wealth of information available on lead?

I've been melting lead for about 65 years as well as 'plumbers' solder which we wiped joints with. If you are melting lead indoors in any case the pot must be well vented to atmosphere so that the operative does not breathe any fumes at all. My brother's mate was 7 years younger than me and died last year from a brain tumour that was said to have been caused by lead. They were both plumbers as me but I 'graduated to being a commercial heating engineer after a few years. He was a very amiable chap was Kev and he did not work on the tools for many years as he was a 'water' inspector. It was up to his twenties he worked with lead.

I make all my sea fishing weights with lead but I do so outside and I never get my nose or mouth over the melting pot. I'm 79 now so something will get me in the end but I hope it's not premature from lead fume inhalation. The danger is very real. It is known that if lead is heated above the melting point it will cause fumes so why would any person working with lead want to heat it

well above it's melting point so that it 'fumes' /oxidises ?

There are many sensible and warning posts here for you..... I've worked with lead a very long time as per the post I wrote. I did not need to look into the smelting of lead till seeing your post and I was interested to see the smelting temps in the various processes is about 1300c. The molted unpure lead is drawn off at about 800c or thereabouts but your question is melting lead hazardous at 1000 c ? the straight answer is yes it is very hazardous.

To date the lowest level of lead in a human body has not been set where that certain low level whatever that is will do harm. Forget drinking plenty of milk if you have had a good whiff of the fumes from any melting lead.

You guys are missing what i am asking, if you read my question i am asking if it will be hazardous in a way that still can make problems whe you got good ventelation and gear. I think there should be no problem, and this is still my understanding after reading your responses. I have contacted some experts so i will see what they say. Should be fine i think if you find a place with a garage to their foundry.

I think you have here a fundamental misunderstanding of what is "safe" and what is "hazardous." Something is safe if no protective equipment or procedures are needed to prevent injury to an individual. A safe activity requires no mitigation to protect individuals of any skill level. Hazardous means an individual can be hurt if protective equipment is not used or if procedures are not rigorously followed. A complicating factor to many hazardous activities is the harm does not have to be acute and readily apparent, like burning flesh. Chronic, cumulative harm is the hidden hazard that ventilation and respiratory gear attempts to mitigate the damage lead fumes create. The very fact you need a procedure (ventilation) and protective equipment (gear) means your activity is hazardous.

Being in a moving car is a hazardous activity. Using the safety gear of seatbelts and the driver obeying the traffic laws mitigates the hazards but the hazards are not removed. Being in a moving car is hazardous.

good post their buddy..... got me LOL

It will be non-<...hazardous...> when all other CR4 subscribers are at least 1000m away from wherever this experiment is being carried out, and upwind of it.

Deliberately venting lead vapours or smoke containing <...lead...> into the local environment is likely to come to the attention of the local Health and Safety executive, who have powers to prosecute if the emissions have the potential to cause harm; that would be <...hazardous...> to the individual carrying out the experiment.

You may be sure it is very - I repeat - very -dangerous. Lead comes into our organism in many ways: contact - respiratory- and through products that contain lead and lead vapor. (paint comes to my mind and many forbidden forms - also lead to increase the octane in fuel)

I know a place where lead has been molten for a long time and the whole village is intoxicated, children are born with birth defects. Need more?

The furnace chimney is 120 feet high.

People get sick from bottom scraping fish like Barracudas with lead in the meat.

Industrial protection has been designed for lead VAPORS - for people who solder - and that is way colder (from 170 degrees C and up to 350 degrees C) than the idiotic 1000 degrees Celsius you are proposing.

You can filter, wash and contain a lot, but it stays somewhere in your environment.

Smoke of your furnace (you probably call it an oven) escapes, lead particles damp down, the cow eats the grass it falls on and also the the soil will be contaminated - so vegetables and milk bring it into your organism forever.

It is a very bad idea and especially in a university, unless they are specialized in this kind of work, which I doubt, since you even ask the question.

There is nothing you need lead of 1000 degrees for that you cannot accomplish with far lower temperatures unless you want to vaporize it and for that there are better applications in use.

My opinion or advise: read the CAS paper about lead.

First, let me be clear on that I do not disagree with the main message in your comment. This is just a correction on one ancillary point

"... People get sick from bottom scraping fish like Barracudas with lead in the meat. ..."

Barracudas are not 'bottom scraping fish". Barracudas are medium size predatory fish and as such accumulate crrtain toxins. Lead is one of those toxins, but it has nothing to do with 'bottom scraping'.

When people do get sick and it can be reasonably associated with consuming barracuda, it is usually ciguatera. Ciguatera is an illness caused by toxins produced by a specific dinoflagellate associated with coral reefs. Herbivorous fish consume the dinoflagellates and the toxins accumulate in predator fish around reefs like barracuda.

Ciguatera is the most common form of seafood poisoning. Ciguatera symptoms can last for month or even years. Some of the neurological symptoms, like numbness in the lips and fingers or a reversal of hot and cold sensation, may seem similar to what one might expect from acute lead poisoning though a more common misdiagnosis is multiple sclerosis. That isn't to say that someone who gets ciguatera didn't ingest a fair amount of lead as well, it is just that the sypmtoms are probably not from the lead.

The smelters that process the galena ore will have filtration and all that is possible to clean the flue gasses & yet there may well be toxic fumes that escape out of the flues when the melting process is carried out...... In the USA I believe the emission laws are very strict due to the USA branded outboards we have here in the UK having the distinctive labelling that says the USA is proud of the extremely low emissions from these engines. It may well be unlawful to not clean the fumes that may well escape your melting procedure which is well above the melting point of lead...... As already stated by quite a few on this topic

and are expert enough to know that there is a danger to anyone who breathes any fumes from melting lead even at it's melting point of 327 c approx.

Hello, I've just re-read the link in your original post that you are using as the basis of some of your safety claims.

following from that there is also a question that we haven't cleared up since it seems that in our concern over the hazards we perceive, we have omitted a simple detail.

How much lead are you intending to process to that temperature. Is it like 1 gram or is it a few kg? The reason that I ask is that the total heating time (and thus the time the metal is molten) will be significantly different.

Your initial reference article however should NOT be regarded as describing appropriate PPE for what you are proposing. Melting lead to cast sinkers would barely heat much beyond the melting point and thus the PPE only needs to deal with some fundamental hazards. The available reaction processes at another 600degrees C or more above what is described go far beyond what that article is referencing. Heck, the article describes changing filter cartridges "when you can smell the meatal, or it's difficult to breathe"!! Not very scientific.

The article also describes ventilation as "working outside", or with a "Good fan" and while these might afford some benefit to the fisherman, they do not do anything to capture the escaping materials that will affect others.

Hints for a "handyman" making is own sinkers is not really suitable as justification for what you describe that is orders of magnitude different.

Benki you have received replies that should warn you about molten lead at it's melting point but you say you will heat it far beyond the melting point! At it's melting point there is another warning for you as you don't have a clue handling

molten lead is that if just a drop of water is infused into that lead at high temp it will empty the pot for you explosively so I should stand well back if you are not sure about the dryness of your lead that you intend to melt...... There is no such thing as 'luck' in this matter but it is more to do with murphy's law = if it can happen it will happen.

As at least one other person has asked, why is it so important to heat it to 1000deg? What are you going to do with it? I'm genuinely intrigued as to why this is so important to you.

I want to know as well!?

I also wanted to point out the obvious.

Melting anything at 1000C is hazardous.

I should have made a better title for the thread since i do know that melting lead at 1000 C Hazardous, i am sorry, this was not the question really, but everyone has responded to the title of the thread and not the real question in the thread, but i do appreciate it very much anyway.
So i have been in contact with a Occupational Health and Safety Specialists that has confirmed my thoughts that there should be no problem at all when you have good gear and ventilation, it is in no way shape or form dangerous, since it is scientifically impossible to get harmed by it as i suspected with common sense and logic our else governments would give out warnings that people should not melt lead, but they dont.
I was told that if you will heat lead at 1000°C in an oven, engineering controls such as local exhaust should be in place. And then you might not even need any gear, but gear is always good.
The point of the experiments will be to document the color of some molten metals to show that some metals will not glow red above 600 C, there is a misunderstanding today that all metals behave in the same way above a certain temperature in regards to color, no one has ever cared to study the color of molten metals, and this is just some very basic information that i will include in a paper together with other basic information, but i think it is very facinating that many people think that all metals allways will glow red above a certain temperature, i know guys in foundries that i have spoken with this about and they agree that this misunderstanding exist amongst experts in metals (which i have confirmed after talking with some metal experts), so i will clear this up in the paper. Every metal expert in the world that believes that all metals and materials will glow red above a certain temperature has one thing in common, they have never in their life seen that all metals glow red because of high temperature, since this kind of thing/experiment never happens anywhere.
In founduries there is also a real common misunderstanding that molten metals/iron will make sparkles when they pour it in the air. You do often get sparks when something is added to the molten metal, but that is often due to the reaction of contaminants (e.g. water) on the surface of the thing you are adding and they often stop as soon as the thing you are adding is submerged in the liquid. ). In general, sparks are due to some chemical reaction that leads to rapid heating and emission of photons. If sparks were produced automatically by molten iron moving through air, casting of molten iron would not be practical, it is a extremely unlikely phenomenon and not seen in practice. It is theoretically possible that liquid iron could interact with the air to form droplets (not chemically react), However, from pouring, it is very unlikely. You need fast-moving air, like in gas atomisation.

I believe you should refresh your knowledge of Max Planck's work (not just the result) on black body radiation and the classical physics prediction of Rayleigh-Jeans and the "Ultra-violet catastrophe." You should also refresh your knowledge of Emission Spectroscopy. This latter production of light is most likely the phenomena you wish to observe. To observe these effects one does not have to have metal exposed to the atmosphere. In fact, having metal exposed to the atmosphere at the temperature you wish to test will produce many transitory chemical products.

Sorry, but I goofed on linking the page I wanted for Emission Spectroscopy. To see all of the spectral lines produced by emission spectroscopy one does have to put the substance into a plasma state but one should know of this phenomena when examining the spectra of anything.

I expect any variations from black body radiation spectra will be from Reflectance and Transmittance of the surface of your metal. A spectral comparison with something else at that temperature (crucible?) and any other radiant source illuminating the surface of your metal will be needed to identify this possibility.

That is interesting. How large of a sample will be heated.

Conversely, how small a sample could prove / disprove your hypothesis?

.. also. How would you view it in either case?

Open air? Camera? Beaker?

Can I come to work with you?

Share a link when you publish.. please.

I dont know yet, maybe 40-50 kg, maybe less or maybe more, i am not sure yet. Do you have access to a foundury or something or how could you help us?, if you can help us with melting experiments from a foundury you have access to you are more then welcome, i will send my email in a PM and you can tell me more if you have the capability of doing experiments.

You don't know yet how you will view the spectrum of your experiment.

LOL ROFL That says it all!

We will use thermal imaging cameras to film this so you can get the temperature profiles as well as normal filming for colour. And we will probably do it in air.
The people making the experiments will maybe be world leading steel/metal experts, they will decide how much metal they think should be used, not me.
You cant find one fact in the scientific literature that tells you that all metals should glow red at above 600 C and your links has nothing to do with this. I look at this issue kinda as a myth that goes back to the year 1833 i think. It has to do with the wrong understanding of the incandescence effect and papers cited like Dionysius Lardner (1833). Treatise on Heat. Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, Green & Longman. Google Scholar finds 27,000 papers on the subject, all these papers have created a myth i think about the color of molten metals that are known not to be true by some people working in foundrys. There has never been any experiments and papers that are based on real experiments that explains how metals don't all glow the same way when heated, this is why wrong interpretations can be made from information, and we will show with real experiments in our coming paper that this Incandescence effect is wrong. There has never been any reason to make experiments that shows how molten metals differs in colors and i also think the area of how they behave when mixed is not something that is really spelled out in the literature either, just like with flashes and lights from metal powders. Even if it is kinda basic information, alot of people including real metal experts have alot of wrong understandings of very basic information regarding these things, since the litterature on these subjects are almost non existent and alot of wrong interpretations can be made about things like the incandescence effect.

I wouldn't trust anything in that amazingly illiterate post.

Ah yes, 27,000 scholarly papers are all wrong because you didn't see them being performed.

You're going to capture the spectrum color of the oxidizing molten metal with film. Will you be using Ektachrome, Kodachrome, Vision3 or NK-3?

Do you realize that the screen in front of you is only three colors? Go ahead, get a magnifier and look closer. I'll wait...... Ok now why would you only believe your eyes?

Have ever wondered why or how thermal imagers can see things in the dark and how they make a temperature measurement without contact?

Yes, they are all "wrong", because the papers are not about anything being performed, i dont understand what you are talking about. Like i said, it is all about bad interpretation of information. There is no science or facts in these papers that tells us that all metals and materials glow red about a certain temperature. It doesn't matter what you or world leading metal experts believes, you all share a common thing, you have not seen how metals behave at 1000 C. I already have information about how metals behave above 600 C and how they dont all glow red or orange, so i already know that i will be able to show that there exist a very real myth in our world in regards to metals, and we live in a world where you sometimes find myths in science that experts believes in without ever having carried out any real scientific studies and experiments.
I don't know anything about the cameras at the university yet. The camera will be able capture the real color of the molten material regardless of what kind of camera we will use, so i dont understand why you speak about my computer screen. The experts at the university will pick the camera.
I was told by a person that spectrographic analysis or atomic absorption analysis could be interesting to look at also for the research.

If you want to observe/demonstrate different metals emitting different spectra at high temperature, why not do exactly that but avoid all the potential for exposure and contamination by toxic metals by working with the metals that are far more benign.

Choose gallium or indium or bismuth or iron or so many other less problematic metals than lead.

Why risk poisoning others and contaminating the environment with toxic heavy metals?

I'm virtually certain that you don't know how to interpret Rixter's Graph in post #3. That is a log log graph, which means that both axes are logarithmic scales. In a logarithmic graph, equal distances represent equal multiplications, not equal additions, as in a linear graph. so while a linear graph could have a scale of: 0,1,2,3,4,5,etc., a logarithmic graph could have a scale of: 10⁰,10¹,10²,10³,10⁴,10⁵,etc., which is, in ordinary numbers: 1,10,100,1000,10000,100000,etc.

The bottom line was given by Rixter near the top of that post:" Six million times as much lead given off at 1000 C as 400 C". [my addition of bold]. Let me try to put this in perspective: There are 86,400 seconds in a day, so six million seconds is just under 70 days of continuous time, or about 208-8 hour days. Thus an unprotected worker who works over molten lead at 400° for 208 working days (with a few days off, that's a full year of work) would breathe in X amount of Lead and lead compounds. The same unprotected worker, doing the same job over the same amount of lead at 1000°, would breathe in X amount of Lead and lead compounds in ONE SECOND!

Next, you say "And we will probably do it in air.". If you do this experiment in air, you won't be measuring the spectrum/color of hot lead, you'll be measuring the spectrum/color of the layer of oxides and other componuds that cover that molten lead.

And finally, you mentioned 40-50 kg of lead! That's at least 10,000 times more than is necessary! 4-5 grams of lead at a given temperature will glow with exactly the same color/spectrum as 40-50 kg. It would take approximately 10.000 times as much energy to heat the larger mass, and it would take considerably more time.

I read his post. So the reason safety specialist from governments wont discourage you from doing molten experiments with lead and why it is legal, is because it is safe with the right kind of ventilation and gear. So it is a matter of finding the place with the right ventilation.
No, we will be measuring the spectrum/color of hot lead and aluminium when we do it in air, and will be able to show how it is wrong that these metals should glow red, because it is in air where these metals have their true color, the color inside of a furnace doesn't count as a true color, inside of a furnace when aluminum is taken past the melting point it will have a very dull red glow to it but it returns to silver very quickly because of its very rapid cooling effect. At no point does molten aluminium resemble molten iron or steel for example. What many metal experts and chemists and materials scientists belive, is that when metals are hot and molten, regardless if they get hot and molten in a furnace or in a fire or by anything else, they think that when they go above 600 C they should ALL glow red/orange, even when they are poured in the air, and this is simply not true, and this is what we will show, but we will not simply heat it in a furnace without pouring it, we haft to show the very rapid cooling effect and how these metals cant glow red/orange at 1000 C when poured in the air, and would not behave like this in a fire for example outside of a furnace, they will always have a silvery color.
The reason for the amount of metal, that i have no clue if we will use that much or not, is because i was told, if i understood it right, that some large furnaces with the capability of high temperatures, need more metal then smaller furnaces i think, and i also need the right amount of metal for it to be able to fall in the air a bit in a good way.

The surface of molten lead in a steel 'pot' is blue but that is when it is starting to absorb heat above it's melting point & that's when I turn the propane torch heating it down but I've never filmed it! Of course it's a lovely silver colour when at it's melting point. and is still silver when it's cooled. I hope that helps save you filming it. Of course if you did film it at 1000C you would need my automatic darkening welding mask on because you would see FA without it at the high temps you might or might not melt 'your' lead or anyone else's for that matter!

I hope your camerqa is heat resistant?

Considering lead melts at 327c (612F),... the fumes are released at 900c which turns to a yellowish-brown color dust when it hits the air.

I didn’t have a chance to do any serious research, but at 1100c there may be some oxidation occurring. Have to look into it more.

I like to add,... you need to be cautious. The ship yards even though it wasn’t quite the same process or exposures, they didn’t do so well with handling lead. Your would need full PPE, not to mention environment controls...

what you want to do, should not be taken lightly.